Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 28 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 4175 contributions

|

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

Agenda item 2 is consideration of continued petitions, the first of which is PE1975, which is on reforming the law relating to strategic lawsuits against public participation, which are sometimes, or probably more commonly, referred to as SLAPPs. The petition, which was lodged by Roger Mullin, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review and amend the law to prevent the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation.

We last considered the petition on 4 October last year. At that time, we agreed to take evidence from stakeholders and, later, from the Minister for Victims and Community Safety. I am pleased to welcome as our witnesses the petitioner, Roger Mullin, who will address the meeting shortly; Justin Borg-Barthet, who is the convener of the anti-SLAPP research hub; Graeme Johnston, a member of the Scotland anti-SLAPP sub-working group of the UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition; and Ahsan Mustafa, a member of the Law Society of Scotland’s civil justice committee.

Good morning to you all, and welcome to our proceedings. As we get into this, if you wish to come in on any of the questions that colleagues ask, please indicate to me. When colleagues are speaking, they will take note that you are seeking to come in. We will clarify who is coming in, so that those who are noting for the Official Report understand who is contributing at any given point. Rather than just speaking extemporaneously, please make sure that you are introduced through the chair.

We have received a written submission from Michelle Thomson MSP, who is unable to attend the meeting. The submission reiterates her support for the petition and notes that the Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation Bill passed its second reading in the United Kingdom Parliament in February. She argues that Scotland has fallen behind other jurisdictions and that we risk becoming a destination of choice for SLAPP action, which may very well form some of the discussion that we are going to have.

I would be grateful if Roger Mullin would say a few words by way of introduction.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

Thank you, Mr Mullin.

I see that Mr Ewing has arrived. You have not missed anything, Mr Ewing. We have just heard the introduction to our evidence session on the petition regarding SLAPPs. I know that you are particularly concerned about that and will wish to come in with questions shortly.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

Is a governmental position of taking a reactive rather than a proactive approach to that possibility not a reasonable one?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

I hear what you say there. Might not the Government argue that, in an otherwise congested legislative environment, to act and to prioritise that when other matters need to be progressed might not be wise in terms of its use of resource and time?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

It is good to have that on the record.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

Yes, that aspect is at the heart of the petition.

Mr Borg-Barthet, I want to understand—you alluded to this—the extent to which the issue is a problem about legal threats rather than about court action. Is that where the centre of gravity is in this matter?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Decision on Taking Business in Private

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

We expect Fergus Ewing to join us shortly, so there is no apology there.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Decision on Taking Business in Private

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

Good morning, and welcome to the sixth meeting in 2024 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. I begin by thanking my deputy convener, David Torrance, for convening the previous meeting of the committee, which had quite a packed agenda of engagement and evidence taking. I am grateful to him.

Our first item is the customary one to agree on whether to take business in private. Under items 4 and 5, we will consider the evidence that we will hear this morning. Do colleagues agree to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

We have a series of areas to explore in detail, but my first question is just meant to ensure our broad understanding of the issue. The committee was engaged by the petition when we saw it. Therefore, we have taken the unusual step of convening this evidence session, which we do not do in relation to every petition.

We have also had a briefing from the Parliament’s independent research unit, the Scottish Parliament information centre. When I read that, I was struck not by the principle of the argument that you are making but by the question of whether, in practice, the different genetic code that Scotland’s legal system has as a result of the way in which it was established means that it is less likely to be overwhelmed by the type of threat that you envisage and that, therefore, a reactive rather than a proactive Government approach to the issue, in the light of evidence, would be an arguable way to go.

What is your view on that? I put that question to you, Mr Mullin, and any of your colleagues.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 April 2024

Jackson Carlaw

It is as if you are suggesting that our legal profession always has an eye to the main chance. That is the conclusion that I am drawing from that.